Cases 21 - 30 of 91
Roger Harper v. David Ballard
as 15-6704
Petitioner - Appellant:
ROGER LEE HARPER
Respondent - Appellee:
DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex
David Lawrence Dixon v. David Ballard
as 15-6669
Petitioner - Appellant:
DAVID LAWRENCE DIXON
Respondent - Appellee:
DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex
Fred Douty v. David Ballard
as 15-6484
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FRED D. DOUTY
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Mt. Olive Correctional Complex, PAUL PERRY, Associate Warden of Security, Mt. Olive Correctional Complex, STEVE CAUDILL, Captain, Mt. Olive Correctional Complex and others
Benny Roberts v. David Ballard
as 14-7556
Petitioner - Appellant:
BENNY RAY ROBERTS
Respondent - Appellee:
DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex
Cedeal Harper v. David Ballard
as 14-7452
Petitioner - Appellant:
CEDEAL T. HARPER
Respondent - Appellee:
DAVID BALLARD, Warden
Jerome Blaney v. David Ballard
as 14-6796
Petitioner - Appellant:
JEROME M. BLANEY
Respondent - Appellee:
DAVID BALLARD
Robbie Campbell v. William Kincaid
as 14-6559
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBBIE E. CAMPBELL
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM KINCAID, (Unit Mgr.) M.O.C.C., TIM WHITTINGTON, (A.W.O.) M.O.C.C., DAVID BALLARD, (Warden) M.O.C.C. and others
Duncan Burress v. Timothy Perkin
as 14-6542
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DUNCAN LAMARR BURRESS
Defendant - Appellee:
TIMOTHY PERKINS, Correctional Officer II, JOSHUA HYPES, Correctional Officer, JEREMY ARBOGAST, Correctional Officer and others
Cedeal Harper v. Captain James McCloud
as 14-6541
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CEDEAL T. HARPER
Defendant - Appellee:
CAPTAIN JAMES MCCLOUD, individually and in their official capacities, DAVID BALLARD, Warden and JIM RUBENSTEIN, Commissioner
Edward Mercer v. David Ballard
as 14-6520
Petitioner - Appellant:
EDWARD J. MERCER
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN DAVID BALLARD
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.